If 94-95 sc,s are better then why are the 89-93s faster

mannysc

Registered User
ive noticed that the fastest sc,s stock for stock are 89-93s why is this if the 94-95s are so much better?

what do the 94-95s do in the 1/4?
anthony coast to coast does a 14 sec stock so many others,
seems the 94-95s are mostly in the low 15s area whats up with this ,

is the added power of the newer blower and bigger injectors just so much wind?

please someone give me a answer
 
The ability...

The 94/95 has a better blower design and larger injectors to make sure to not run out of fuel. The 94/95's also have smaller cams. The cams in 89-93 are larger and a bit better at getting air out.

Many people are also modding the 89-93 since less than 8,000 of the 94/95's were produced. I just think that the masses own a lot of early models. The later models are also harder to mod since they are harder to tune. The early models are MUCH EASIER to tune and therefore, make a better donor for performance work.

That's my opinion anyway!!!!


P.S. How's the car running Manny!!!



Don
 
umm, im not sure, but most of the faster 89-93's have ported or newer model blowers that the 94-95's have, as well as bigger injectors. Is the 89-93 possibly more aerodynamic or lighter weight than the newer ones?

Most likely it is that the 89-93's are much more available, so people start with those more often when they build them up, and a lot of the 94-95's are probably stock or near.

Stock for stock im sure a 94-95 would be quicker than an 89-93, but im going to guess that most of the more modded SCs started as 89-93's because they are much more common and easier to get ahold of. And if you're gonna port your blower or get a new one altogether, it becomes a moot point what blower came stock on the car ;)
 
mygood buddy coast to coast has a completely stock sc 5 spd turning 14s im talking stock not modified why are there 14 sec stock 89-93 sc,s and they are rated at 210 hp and the 94-95 has 235 and is turning 15s,
yes the moded cars are fast but Im talking showroom stock .

mine has always been fast thats why I kept this one .

oh yeah ? how my sc running? verywell its running like a raped ape!
ported heads ported blower raised deck lower manifold 3 inch inlet tube 70mm tb moded maf , water to air ic inverted blower .
 
lube70 said:
The 94/95's also have smaller cams. The cams in 89-93 are larger and a bit better at getting air out.


I have a '94. Does that mean I could get cams from an 89-93 & put them in my car, is it possible, worth it, any performance gains or should I just buy some aftermarket cams?
 
Yes the cams are all the same. Another big diffrence in the early SC's is the transmission gearing. The 4R70W has wider gearing than the AOD which makes it slightly slower. But with the biger blower and injectorss it makes up for it. My opinoin is there right about the same.
 
Last edited:
rad_al_ said:
I have a '94. Does that mean I could get cams from an 89-93 & put them in my car, is it possible, worth it, any performance gains or should I just buy some aftermarket cams?

Whats this talk about "cams". This is a pushrod motor, one cam. Some people say the 89 5-speed cam is the best for a stock motor. But if you are going to go through the trouble of swapping a cam, get a coy miller stage 1 or a crane baby cam or something worth while that will give you some power.
 
The blower is not "bigger"-just more efficient-you can go to the Magnum Powers website to see the differences between the 89-93 and the 94/95 superchargers.
 
A Question...

I know that Coast-to-Coast ran a 14.9 on his last run before blowing his HG's. Has he run the rebuild? He is an outstanding driver and his car has always been the factest stock in the So Cal chapter. He was the exception and not the norm. His car even dyno'd higher than everyone elses...a very cool and exceptional car and driver. Certainly at the top of the So Cal heap with the rest of the stockers in the mid to high 15's, just like the majority of the other stock early SC's.
Just my two cents.
 
I would think that if one would buy a early model SC vs a newer model, that one would have more money left over for mods. There is also the factor that an early model sc is NOT just like another early model and a newer model is NOT made just like every other newer model. Quality control plays a big factor in that one of a certain model year is going to be the fastest and one is going to be the slowest (parts not matching up well but within specifications). My SC seems to be kind of on the slow side compared to other peoples' SC's of the same year. My parents owned a 1988 Pontiac GTA that ran a 6.0 second zero to 60mph on a vericom computer (not at a track). Motortrend said that their test vehicle ran a 6.6 second zero to 60mph. That car seemed to be pretty fast also (butt-o-meter). Just my .02.
 
Details, details

Thanks for the prop's Manny and Ron. The car has run a fastest of 14.8 on the street tires and a low 14.7 on Lee's DR's. These were both at Fontana (So Cals fastest track for me). It did not get a rebuild but the valves were ground and Wynn's manifolds were added after which it has run within a few hundredths of its pre-HG times at LACR (15.3=14.8 at sea level). The 3 stock cats are about dead as shown by my last bout with the smog Nazis so my days of campaigning a totaly stock car are nearly over. I have weighed the car and it came in at 4000lbs. with <1/2 tank and no driver so it's certainly no lightweight. I think the rarity/cost of the late model cars is the reason they are not all over the place on the fastest list.

Anthony
 
Agreed. I would certainly like to at least go 11s in my late model but I most certainly wouldn't think of making it an all out drag car. I really like it as a street car and I figure with lotsa motor mods, a 50 shot and the autorotor the 3.8 is very capable of 11s if not 10s in a generally streetable trim. Maybe throw some drag lites and M/T ET Streets on there but that still counts. :cool:
 
I've owned several 94 auto SC'a and an 89 and 93 auto...They all ran 15.4's at the track

Overall though Id say the 94/95 is a nicer car.

As far as tuning there has been less experience tuning 94/95 because so little of them were made as Don had said..
 
Back
Top